Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

FcγRIIa - dependent platelet activation identified in COVID-19 vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia-, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, streptokinase- and anisoylated plasminogen-streptokinase activator complex-induced platelet activation

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which was caused by the coronavirus - severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was globally responsible for remarkable morbidity and mortality. Several highly effective vaccines for COVID-19 were developed and disseminated worldwide within an unprecedented timescale. Rare but dangerous clotting and thrombocytopenia events, and subsequent coagulation abnormalities, have been reported after massive vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Soon after their global rollout, reports of a morbid clinical syndrome following vaccination with adenovirus-DNA-based vaccines appeared. In the spring of 2021, reports of a novel, rare and morbid clinical syndrome, with clinically devastating and fatal complication after vaccination with adenovirus-based coronavirus vaccines (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson and Astra-Zeneca vaccines) led to a brief suspension of their use by several countries. Those complications were associated with unusual cerebral and splanchnic venous thrombosis, and circulating autoantibodies directed against anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4), a protein secreted from platelets, leading to the designation: Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT). The reported VITT incidence remains very low and does not affect the overall benefit of immunization, however, if left untreated, VITT can be debilitating or even fatal. VITT resembled specific adverse drugs' reactions that also involved the production of autoantibodies and subsequent abnormal platelet activation through platelet FcγRIIa. These unusual but well-documented drug reactions were heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), streptokinase- (SK), and anisoylated plasminogen-streptokinase activator complex- (APSAC) associated with platelet-activating antibodies. There was considerable overlapping of clinical features between VITT, COVID-19 and these adverse drugs' reactions. We review the phenomenon of VITT against the backdrop of shared and common mechanisms that underlie HIT-, SK-, and APSAC-platelet FcγRIIa-dependent platelet activation. An understanding of VITT's pathogenesis may be achieved by comparing and contrasting VITT-, HIT-, SK- and APSAC-induced platelet activation mechanisms, their respective physiopathology and similarities. Discussing these conditions in parallel provides insight into complex immunological disorders and diseases associated with abnormal hemostasis and thrombosis in particular.

Vitrectomy for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy in a Patient with Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Introduction

In this study, we report a case of proliferative diabetic retinopathy in a patient with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in whom vitrectomy was performed with good results.

Case

A 57-year-old man presented with a chief complaint of decreased visual acuity (VA) in the left eye. Corrected VA of the left eye was 0.03, and ophthalmic examination showed fibrovascular membranes along the vascular arcade and a combined rhegmatogenous-traction retinal detachment with a macular hole. The patient began hemodialysis for diabetic nephropathy in March 2014; thrombocytopenia developed after dialysis was started, and HIT was diagnosed after further evaluation. Argatroban hydrate was being used during dialysis. Treatment was switched from warfarin to argatroban hydrate 6 days prior to vitrectomy being performed on the patient's left eye. Although there was bleeding with somewhat difficult hemostasis during the intraoperative treatment of the fibrovascular membranes, surgery was completed without complications and the postoperative course was good.

Discussion

Vitrectomy was performed with good results in this patient with HIT. Treatment with argatroban hydrate during surgery enabled surgery without the danger of intraoperative clotting.

Bleeding and thrombotic complications of kidney disease

With the rising prevalence of kidney disease, clinicians are increasingly faced with concerns about potential thrombotic and bleeding complications. Thrombotic risk, both arterial and venous, predominates with all severities of kidney disease but bleeding manifestations become an additional concern particularly with uraemia. This article reviews these contrasting problems and discusses strategies for prevention and management in the context of renal impairment, renal replacement therapy and renal transplantation.

Treatment and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)

This chapter about the recognition, treatment, and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is part of the Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do, or do not, outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patient values may lead to different choices. Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: For patients receiving heparin in whom the clinician considers the risk of HIT to be > 1.0%, we recommend platelet count monitoring over no platelet count monitoring (Grade 1C). For patients who are receiving heparin or have received heparin within the previous 2 weeks, we recommend investigating for a diagnosis of HIT if the platelet count falls by >/= 50%, and/or a thrombotic event occurs, between days 5 and 14 (inclusive) following initiation of heparin, even if the patient is no longer receiving heparin therapy when thrombosis or thrombocytopenia has occurred (Grade 1C). For patients with strongly suspected (or confirmed) HIT, whether or not complicated by thrombosis, we recommend use of an alternative, nonheparin anticoagulant (danaparoid [Grade 1B], lepirudin [Grade 1C], argatroban [Grade 1C], fondaparinux [Grade 2C], or bivalirudin [Grade 2C]) over the further use of unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) therapy or initiation/continuation of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) [Grade 1B]. The guidelines include specific recommendations for nonheparin anticoagulant dosing that differ from the package inserts. For patients with strongly suspected or confirmed HIT, we recommend against the use of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) [coumarin] therapy until after the platelet count has substantially recovered (usually, to at least 150 x 10(9)/L) over starting VKA therapy at a lower platelet count (Grade 1B); that VKA therapy be started only with low maintenance doses (maximum, 5 mg of warfarin or 6 mg of phenprocoumon) over higher initial doses (Grade 1B); and that the nonheparin anticoagulant (eg, lepirudin, argatroban, danaparoid) be continued until the platelet count has reached a stable plateau, the international normalized ratio (INR) has reached the intended target range, and after a minimum overlap of at least 5 days between nonheparin anticoagulation and VKA therapy rather than a shorter overlap (Grade 1B). For patients receiving VKAs at the time of diagnosis of HIT, we recommend use of vitamin K (10 mg po or 5 to 10 mg IV) [Grade 1C].

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: clinical manifestations and management strategies

Thrombocytopenia is a relatively frequent and usually benign clinical complication of heparin therapy. However, some patients receiving heparin and heparin-based products experience an immune-mediated reaction due to the development of heparin-induced antibodies. This reaction leads to a highly specific and paradoxical form of thrombocytopenia, known as type II heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Unlike other types of drug-induced thrombocytopenia, HIT promotes thrombosis rather than bleeding; therefore HIT should be suspected in patients who experience thrombotic events despite adequate anticoagulation therapy. Early identification and treatment of HIT can prevent more serious complications associated with this disorder (e.g., exacerbation of venous thromboembolism, limb gangrene, and skin necrosis). Both arterial and venous thrombosis can arise from a single episode of HIT. Routine assessment of platelet counts is necessary with heparin therapy, as a decreased platelet level is usually the only indication of HIT. Although compared with unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin therapy is less likely to result in HIT, the use of these agents is contraindicated in HIT patients. Concomitant warfarin therapy is not contraindicated in such patients but must be carefully monitored. Treatment with a direct thrombin inhibitor, such as lepirudin or argatroban, is an effective strategy in reversing the thrombocytopenia associated with HIT and reducing its complications. This article discusses the clinical syndrome of HIT, including pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria, clinical presentations, and current available management strategies in the context of 2 case studies.

Management of the anticoagulated patient

Excessive bleeding or thrombosis is a preeminent concern for all surgeons. Patients may be at risk because of medical therapy, underlying disease, or complications related to both. An understanding of the coagulation cascade--mechanisms and tests of function--permits a rational, if not always complete, basis for a plan of therapy. Newer anticoagulation medications are changing how thrombotic complications, such a VTE or graft occlusion, are treated or prevented. This entire area is undergoing rapid evolution, and the approaches that have been standard for decades soon will be supplanted. Ultimately, however, the most important assessment is made at the bedside by the clinician.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: recognition, treatment, and prevention: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy

This chapter about the recognition, treatment, and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is part of the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: Evidence Based Guidelines. Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do, or do not, outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patients' values may lead to different choices (for a full understanding of the grading, see Guyatt et al, CHEST 2004; 126:179S-187S). Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: For patients in whom the risk of HIT is considered to be > 0.1%, we recommend platelet count monitoring (Grade 1C). For patients who are receiving therapeutic-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH), we suggest at least every-other-day platelet count monitoring until day 14, or until UFH is stopped, whichever occurs first (Grade 2C). For patients who are receiving postoperative antithrombotic prophylaxis with UFH (HIT risk > 1%), we suggest at least every-other-day platelet count monitoring between postoperative days 4 to 14 (or until UFH is stopped, whichever occurs first) [Grade 2C]. For medical/obstetric patients who are receiving prophylactic-dose UFH, postoperative patients receiving prophylactic-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), postoperative patients receiving intravascular catheter UFH "flushes," or medical/obstetrical patients receiving LMWH after first receiving UFH (risk, 0.1 to 1%), we suggest platelet count monitoring every 2 days or 3 days from day 4 to day 14, or until heparin is stopped, whichever occurs first (Grade 2C). For medical/obstetrical patients who are only receiving LMWH, or medical patients who are receiving only intravascular catheter UFH flushes (risk < 0.1%), we suggest clinicians do not use routine platelet count monitoring (Grade 2C). For patients with strongly suspected (or confirmed) HIT, whether or not complicated by thrombosis, we recommend use of an alternative anticoagulant, such as lepirudin (Grade 1C+), argatroban (Grade 1C), bivalirudin (Grade 2C), or danaparoid (Grade 1B). For patients with strongly suspected (or confirmed) HIT, we recommend routine ultrasonography of the lower-limb veins for investigation of deep venous thrombosis (Grade 1C); against the use of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) [coumarin] therapy until after the platelet count has substantially recovered; that the VKA antagonist be administered only during overlapping alternative anticoagulation (minimum 5-day overlap); and begun with low, maintenance doses (all Grade 2C). For patients receiving VKAs at the time of diagnosis of HIT, we recommend use of vitamin K (Grade 2C) [corrected] For patients with a history of HIT who are HIT antibody negative and require cardiac surgery, we recommend use of UFH (Grade 1C).

Thromboembolism during pregnancy. Risks, challenges, and recommendations

Pregnancy is an important risk factor for venous thrombosis, and venous thromboembolism is a leading cause of preventable death in pregnancy. Diagnosis of venous thromboembolism is complicated in that the symptoms of dyspnea and lower extremity edema are relatively common complaints of pregnant patients. Physicians should maintain an appropriately high index of suspicion and request diagnostic imaging in a timely manner. Diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis with Doppler ultrasonography of the lower extremity poses no health risk to the fetus, but other radiographic studies pose a low radiation risk to the fetus. Because anticoagulant therapy poses a greater health risk to mother and fetus than does the radiation required for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, clinicians should aggressively pursue objective evidence of venous thromboembolism. Once the diagnosis is made, anticoagulation with intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin should be used prepartum followed by warfarin therapy after delivery.

Acute profound thrombocytopenia following abciximab therapy

OBJECTIVE

To report a case of acute, profound thrombocytopenia (APT), defined as an abrupt drop in platelet count to <20,000/mm3 that occurred within 24 hours of administration of an abciximab bolus, to summarize other abciximab-associated APT cases reported in the literature, to review the postulated mechanisms behind this reaction, and to emphasize the importance of periodically monitoring platelet counts after initiating abciximab therapy.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and Index Medicus searches restricted to English-language literature from 1993 through June 1999 were conducted. MeSH headings included abciximab, ReoPro, thrombocytopenia, and glycoprotein IIb-IIIa (GP IIb-IIIa) inhibitors. References of the articles obtained were also reviewed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Search and evaluation were focused on published case reports and reviews of abciximab-induced APT, as well as the incidence of thrombocytopenia from the drug compared with that from other GP IIb-IIIa inhibitors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Platelet aggregation has been identified as the structural basis for coronary thrombosis. This may lead to ischemic complications during acute coronary syndromes or following coronary intervention procedures. The use of GP IIb-IIIa inhibitors such as abciximab as antiplatelet agents has been effective in reducing these ischemic complications. We summarize 15 published cases of abciximab-associated APT gathered from data on 2,482 patients treated with the drug. Prior to suspecting abciximab, other potential causes of thrombocytopenia should be evaluated. It is important to monitor the platelet count at baseline, two hours after initiating abciximab, and 24 hours after initiation of therapy or prior to discharge, whichever comes first, to identify patients at risk for developing APT. If APT occurs and is left untreated, it can produce excessive hemorrhage and ischemia, potentially leading to death. Platelet transfusions have been more effective than immunoglobulin in the management of APT.

CONCLUSIONS

Abciximab-induced APT has a low incidence of occurrence. If it does develop and is not recognized or treated promptly, it can lead to serious hemorrhagic complications. Consequently, monitoring the platelet count two hours after initiation of the infusion is essential. If APT develops, abciximab should be discontinued and a platelet transfusion should be considered.

Venous thromboembolism in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism are among the most common complications of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), an antibody-mediated adverse effect of heparin that leads paradoxically to in vivo activation of platelets and the coagulation system. Inappropriate treatment of HIT-associated DVT with warfarin can cause the DVT to progress to limb gangrene: this results from impaired ability of the protein C natural anticoagulant pathway to down-regulate thrombin generation, thus leading to microvascular thrombosis and tissue necrosis. Appreciation of the importance of coagulation system activation in HIT provides a rationale for treatments that reduce thrombin generation, either via inhibiting factor Xa (danaparoid) or via inhibiting thrombin directly (lepirudin). Clinicians should know how to distinguish HIT from other thrombocytopenic disorders: for example, thrombocytopenia associated with pulmonary embolism can mimic HIT (pseudo-HIT), and acute dyspnea that can mimic acute pulmonary embolism can result from acute in vivo platelet activation in a patient with HIT antibodies who receives heparin bolus therapy (pseudo-pulmonary embolism).

Evaluation and management of drug-induced thrombocytopenia in the acutely ill patient

The numerous drugs to which the acutely ill are exposed place these patients at a significant risk of developing drug-induced thrombocytopenia. Such patients tend to have preexisting hemostatic defects that place them at additional risk of complications as a result of the drug-induced thrombocytopenia. The clinical challenge is to provide rapid identification and removal of the offending agent before clinically significant bleeding or, in the case of heparin, thrombosis results. Drug-induced thrombocytopenic disorders can be classified into three mechanisms: bone marrow suppression, immune-mediated destruction, and platelet aggregation. Clinical characteristics, preliminary laboratory findings, and drug history specific to the mechanisms can assist clinicians in rapidly isolating the causative drug.

Low-molecular-weight heparins in the treatment of deep-vein thrombosis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the characteristics and clinical efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the treatment of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT). Adverse effects, dosing, and cost issues are also discussed.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search (January 1984-October 1997) was used to identify pertinent French and English literature, including clinical trials and reviews on LMWHs and their use in DVT.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials comparing dalteparin, enoxaparin, tinzaparin, and nadroparin with UFH were selected. As studies were numerous, only randomized trials including more than 50 patients were reviewed. Moreover, all patients studied had a first episode of symptomatic DVT confirmed by objective tests (i.e., venography, duplex ultrasonography, impedance plethysmography). Clinical efficacy and safety of LMWHs were assessed in these trials.

DATA EXTRACTION

Results pertaining to venographic assessment, recurrent thromboembolism, total mortality, and bleeding complications were extracted from the selected studies.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Compared with UFH, LMWHs have a longer plasma half-life, better subcutaneous bioavailability, more predictable anticoagulant response, and require less intense laboratory monitoring. Most trials demonstrate comparable effects on thrombus extension and incidence of recurrent thromboembolism. Compared with UFH, LMWHs do not alter total mortality. Although animal trials predict a lower hemorrhagic potential for LMWHs, the incidence of bleeding complications is generally similar to that observed with UFH. Outpatient management of DVT with LMWHs has shown comparable safety and efficacy with inpatient UFH use but a shorter hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Because LMWHs are as safe and as effective as UFH, and because of their more convenient method of administration, they can be considered valuable alternatives for the treatment of DVT. Savings generated by less intensive laboratory monitoring and the possibility of early hospital discharge and outpatient therapy may outweight the higher acquisition cost of LMWHs.